Israel’s Final Restoration

[eternally-gratefull]

I know you premills with your weird doctrines like the back of my hand. I was pre-mill myself as a result of Scofield until I saw the fallacies, and the weird stretching of Greek and Hebrew that was necessary,

1 Scofied has no bearing on my theology, I follow the word of God.

so the Jews at the end are not to be forgiven?

What?? This makes no sense. Everyone who repents will be forgiven. But romans 11 is not talking about us, it is talking about them.

except it robs you of the whole OT LOL

No actually it makes the OT flow smoothlessly and seemlessly, and I do not have to change things to make them fit my belief system.

so do I, as interpreted by the NT

So OT promises mean nothing?

then in reality NT promises do not either.

which is why your theology is so dangerous. It says Gods promises mean nothing

LOL LOL

Yeah keep laughing,,

see above

What, That you said we teach something we do not?

All ANYONE has to do is read your posts. then read ours, and they can see we do not teach what you say we do/

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It is an obsession with the Jews, you guys totally dismiss scripture that plainly states fleshy Israel are not the children of God.

Romans 9:8 KJV
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Children of the flesh are the physical descendants of Israel. What do you think children of the flesh means?

whatever dude. Our obsession and your antisemetism.

Neither excuse holds water as for the tru interpretation. so get off it, please.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Can you explain this verse? There are two Israels, who are they?

Romans 9:6 KJV
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

that has no bearing on romans 11..

 

[royalscot]

Not true.

Romans 9:6
"For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel...
In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring."

Its important to know theological views of Paul and how he uses words to understand his letters.

by believing in faith , we become children, that have been saved by god, through jesus christ.

25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

all joined, by a saviour, though faith, in jesus christ. paul has to convey the written message some how. etc

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It needs a really huge construction of:
- two returns of Christ (one invisible, one visible),
- possibility to be saved by faith after the church is taken away (logically inconsistent, because church is all who are saved),
- two salvation plans (one for believing Jews, one for unbelieving Jews who will be forced to believe in the end)

...to see some future event for Israel in Paul's letters. This view was unknown in church until dispensational theology came in 1890, teaching about literal 1000 years, church as being only a temporary event in the plan for Israel etc.

lol, and who is listening to men?

You hold to the view of the pagan church.. I will hold to the view of scripture.

You do realise your belief came from severe antisemetism do you not? not that you are.. just saying

thus arguent has no value. anymore thanyours does

 

[KJV1611]

that has no bearing on romans 11..

Sure it has bearing on Romans 11. Romans 11 is talking about Israel and my question to you is which Israel is Romans 11 talking about.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

That's a very good way to put it... "IN THIS WAY all Israel will be saved". I don't think the Zionist understand that their are two Israels in the bible, fleshly Israel and spiritual Israel, they lump them all together as flehly Israel.

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;

making a people turn from their sin, and saving them from their sin are two different things.

The NIV did get it right, You just interpret it wrong.

Paul is talking of a future event either way, so your wrong no matter what, The cross is past tense by this time.

 

[trofimus]

1. Israel

11 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

I think Paul can explain it better than I could.

Yes, Paul was a literal Jew. But look at how he works with the salvation of Jews - even he, as a Jew, can be saved in church!! That is the context of this verse. Not any future event.

Read carefully:

"I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them." Rom 11:14

Salvation plan for Jews is the same as for us.


2. The prophecy about taking away sins

It has nothing to do with us, It has to do with a nation of people. (Israel) who are blinded in part today, Who are enemies of th egospel. but beloved because of the fathers, But will repent (as a nation) in the future..

Oh, taking away our sins has nothing to do with us? Can you prove that somehow? I thought its the basis of Christianity.

 

[trofimus]

lol, and who is listening to men?

You hold to the view of the pagan church.. I will hold to the view of scripture.

You do realise your belief came from severe antisemetism do you not? not that you are.. just saying

thus arguent has no value. anymore thanyours does

What do you mean by pagan church? Church from 1st to 19th century?
What do you mean by antisemitism? The thing that every man on this planet has the same way of salvation is antisemitism?

 

[KJV1611]

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;

making a people turn from their sin, and saving them from their sin are two different things.

The NIV did get it right, You just interpret it wrong.

Paul is talking of a future event either way, so your wrong no matter what, The cross is past tense by this time.

The deliverer came out of Zion 2000 years ago.

 

[royalscot]

6 he says:
"It is too light a thing that you should be my servant
to raise up the tribes of Jacob
and to bring back the preserved of Israel;
I will make you as a light for the nations,
that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth."Isaiah 49: The Servant of the LORD

 

[trofimus]

It has nothing to do with us, It has to do with a nation of people. (Israel) who are blinded in part today, Who are enemies of th egospel. but beloved because of the fathers, But will repent (as a nation) in the future..

How do you know Israel will repent as a nation in the future? Do you have some Bible verses for that? Except of "in this way all Israel will be saved" we are discussing right now.

 

[crossnote]

The deliverer came out of Zion 2000 years ago.

Reread the verse. If that is fulfilled 2000 years ago why is ungodliness still a part of Jacob?

Romans 11:26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, "The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob"; (Rom. 11:26 ESV)

 

[crossnote]

How do you know Israel will repent as a nation in the future? Do you have some Bible verses for that? Except of "in this way all Israel will be saved" we are discussing right now.

I gave two posts of Scriptures (post # 21-22) showing God keeping His Promises and restoring the nation of Israel, but your so stuck on your man made ideas concerning Israel I guess what God says means nothing.

 

[trofimus]

I gave two posts of Scriptures (post # 21-22) showing God keeping His Promises and restoring the nation of Israel, but your so stuck on your man made ideas concerning Israel I guess what God says means nothing.

Could you stop attacking me personally in the way "your man made ideas vs what God says"?
It will be more christian-like and better for the discussion.

You must prove that your interpretation of God's word is correct, you cant just postulate it and attack others with that.

 

[crossnote]

Could you stop attacking me personally in the way "your man made ideas vs what God says"?
It will be more christian-like and better for the discussion.

You must prove that your interpretation of God's word is correct, you cant just postulate it and attack others with that.

OK, fair 'nuff. I gave ample Scriptures (posts 21&22) showing God's promise of future dealings in bringing them back to their land...there was no response, only a flow continual opinions contradicting what God had said, thus my conclusion was that certain persons are going to hold to their biases regardless.

 

[trofimus]

OK, fair 'nuff. I gave ample Scriptures (posts 21&22) showing God's promise of future dealings in bringing them back to their land...there was no response, only a flow continual opinions contradicting what God had said, thus my conclusion was that certain persons are going to hold to their biases regardless.

Some of these prophecies were fulfilled even before the first coming of Christ, some are spiritual about Christ and church, as New testament says.
If you think that they were intended to be fulfilled multiple times in history or that they must be all literal and not spiritual, you can show us why.

 

[Angela53510]

In Seminary, even the pre-trib, pre-millennial professors said, "There is NO plan B for the Jews!"

Again, one needs to look at who Israel is, once Christ fuflilled everything in the Old Testament. And do all those OT Scriptures to prove something in a Gentile future, way down the road? Not really!

Much easier to understand the giving back of the land as when the exiles from Judah return from Babylon. That was the Jews last chance to get it, right, and they went from the extreme of not following God, but foreign gods to the other extreme of thinking they were saved by the law.

As for the 3 millennium references in Revelation 20, the only place that is found in the Bible - so really one reference repeated three times. And good hermeneutics never makes a doctrine out of one reference, or for that matter, three found only in one chapter.

Especially in a book that is symbolic!

I look forward to the return of Christ, when he will restore the earth and rule and reign over us for eternity. Instead of a literal 1000 year reign with saints and sinners, which is problematic in itself, let alone Satan being released after the millennium. And what happens after that? I am sure the Bible is not supposed to end on a cliff hanger about the future!

 

[KJV1611]

whatever dude. Our obsession and your antisemetism.

Neither excuse holds water as for the tru interpretation. so get off it, please.

Are you able to answer the question... who are the flesh children of Israel?

 

[KJV1611]

Reread the verse. If that is fulfilled 2000 years ago why is ungodliness still a part of Jacob?

Romans 11:26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, "The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob"; (Rom. 11:26 ESV)

There's a covenant involved with turning away ungodliness from Jacob, what covenant do you think verse 27 is talking about and when was that covenant with Jacob (Israel) given?

Romans 11:26-27 KJV
And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: [27] For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.